alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, United States District 1

Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.

___________

No. 95-2474

___________

Alexander B. Davis, *

 *

Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

 * District Court for the

v. * Eastern District of Missouri.

 *

United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: June 27, 1996

 Filed: July 5, 1996

___________

Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Alexander B. Davis appeals from the district court’s denial of his 1

28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion without an evidentiary hearing. After carefully

reviewing the record before us and the parties’ briefs, we conclude the

district court's judgment was correct. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th

Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 124 (Monday, June 29, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 35278]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17155]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[AZ-020-5410-A159; AZA 30673]


Application for Conveyance of Federally-Owned Mineral Interests, 
Arizona

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: An application for the conveyance of federally-owned minerals 
has been filed under the provisions of 43 U.S.C. 1720 for the following 
described lands:

Gila and Salt River Meridian, Arizona

T. 6 N., R. 4 E.,
    Sec. 11, NW\1/4\.

     containing 160 acres.

    Upon publication in the Federal Register, the mineral interests 
owned by the United States in the land described above will be 
segregated from appropriation under the public land laws, including the 
mining laws. The segregation will terminate upon issuance of a patent 
for the mineral interests, rejection of the application, or 2 years 
from the date of publication, whichever occurs first.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Neel McBride, (602) 417-9353, Arizona 
State Office, 222 N. Central Ave., Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2203.

    Dated: June 16, 1998.
Mary Jo Yoas,
Supervisor, Lands and Minerals Operations.
[FR Doc. 98-17155 Filed 6-26-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-32-P
| 1. | the      annual report on Form 10-Q of Falcon Ridge Development Inc., for the      period ended December 31, 2008  (the “Report”) fully complies      with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange      Act of 1934; and |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | the      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Falcon      Ridge Development Inc. |
|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
|   |   |   |
|   |   |

|                                                                                                                    |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| /s/ Karen Y DuranKaren      Duran,  Chief Financial Officer of  Falcon      Ridge Development, Inc. |   |
#### *State, Respondent, v. McGovern, Petitioner,*

No. 91815-5.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 32197-5-III, May 19, 2015, 187 Wn. App. 1031. *Denied*November 4, 2015.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.2

          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Christopher Westad, the President, Chief Financial Officer and Director of
Able Energy, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my
knowledge:

(1)  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the Quarter ended
December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and

(2)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated: February 7, 2003


/s/ Christopher Westad
----------------------
Name: Christopher Westad
Title: President, Chief Financial Officer and Director
No. 10-7535.

#### Filiberto Gonzalez-Rodriguez, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1154, 131 S. Ct. 947,

178 L. Ed. 2d 783,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 218.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 395 Fed. Appx. 443.
No. 10-1191.

#### Dawn S. Sherman, a Minor, Through Robert I. Sherman, Her Father and Next Friend, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, Petitioner v. Christopher Koch, Illinois State Superintendent of Education.

565 U.S. 815, 132 S. Ct. 92,

181 L. Ed. 2d 22,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6890.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.

Same case below, 623 F.3d 501.
IIB 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 277 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 16, 2019 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Small Business and 

Entrepreneurship 

AN ACT 

To adjust collateral requirements under the Small Business 

Act for disaster loans, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 277 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Access to Sufficient 

3 Capital for Everyone in Natural Disaster areas Act of 

4 2019’’ or the ‘‘ASCEND Act of 2019’’. 

5 SEC. 2. COLLATERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DISASTER 

6 LOANS UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT. 

7 (a) AMENDMENT TO THE RISE AFTER DISASTER

8 ACT OF 2015.—Section 2102 of the RISE After Disaster 

9 Act of 2015 (Public Law 114–88) is amended— 

10 (1) by striking subsections (b) and (c); and 

11 (2) by striking ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—’’. 

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

13 subsection (a) shall take effect as though enacted as part 

14 of the RISE After Disaster Act of 2015. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 15, 2019. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


jbell on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
No. 10-7154.

#### Ernesto Gonzales, Petitioner v. Texas.

562 U.S. 1146, 131 S. Ct. 921,

178 L. Ed. 2d 768,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 582.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.

Same case below, 313 S.W.3d 840.
No. 10-11170.

#### Adrian Marion Smith, Petitioner v. Bridgestone North America Tire Operations LLC, et al.

565 U.S. 805, 132 S. Ct. 378,

181 L. Ed. 2d 6,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6371.

October 3, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8.

Same case below, 420 Fed. Appx. 300.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7121
BOUNDARY MCCALL, Plaintiff - Appellant, and ERIC LEON WALTERS, Plaintiff, versus MICKY RAY; MR. GRAVETT; MR. SMITH; JOHN DOE, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. William B. Traxler, Jr., District Judge. (CA-96-1059-9-21JC) Submitted: February 27, 1997 Decided: March 11, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Boundary McCall, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his action brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We have reviewedthe record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. McCall v. Ray , No. CA-96-1059-9-21JC (D.S.C. June 28, 1996). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
## Attachment 5 – Detailed Meeting Requirements

## 

**Meetings held at Warner Robins ALC include, but are not limited to:**

Four (4) Daily Meetings, one in each Maintenance Group 

4 DREPs – Site Manager and/ or work center leads attend 

One (1) Twice Weekly Meeting 

1 DREP – Site Manager and/ or work center leads attend 

Nine (9) Weekly Meetings: Some are at the Maintenance Group and some are at the Work Center Level 

1 Vending machine Proof of Concept meeting – Site Manager attends 

6 DREPs – Site Manager and/ or work center leads attend 

2 weekly Audits with DLA, COR, and USAF – Site Manager and/ or work center leads attend 

1 status call with DLA Troop Support – Site Manager attends

**Meetings held at Oklahoma City ALC include, but are not limited to:**

Sixteen (16) Weekly Meetings: Some are at the Maintenance Group and some are at the Work Center Level 

12 DREPs – Site Manager and/ or work center leads attend in which managers and/or leads attend 

1 Vending machine Proof of Concept meeting – Site Manager attends 

1 status call with DLA Troop Support – Site Manager attends 

2 status meetings with USAF mechanics – Site Manager attends 

One (1) Material Status Meetings every three (3) weeks 

1 status meeting with USAF mechanics – Site Manager attends 

**Meetings held at Ogden ALC include, but are not limited to:**

Eight (8) Material Status Weekly Meetings: 

5 White Boards – Site Manager and/ or work center leads attend 

2 DREPs – Site Manager and/ or work center leads attend 

1 status call with DLA Troop Support – Site Manager attends 

Three (3) Monthly Meetings: 

2 DREPs – Site Manager attends 

1 Vending machine Proof of Concept meeting – Site Manager and/ or work center leads attend 

Two (2) Material Status Meetings that are held as needed on an indefinite basis 

2 status calls that only Supportability Analysts attend
Order entered August 22, 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05
- 22
- 00076
- CV
SEVEN THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED NINETY DOLLARS IN UNITED

STATES CURRENCY , Appellant

V. STAT E OF TEXAS , Appellee On Appeal from the 193rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 21
- 00937

O RDER Before Chief Justice Burns and Justices Molberg and Goldstein Before the Court are appellant ’ s August 18, 2022 motion for e xtension of time to file his motion for rehearing and his mot ion for rehearing . In th e motion for extension of ti me appellant explains that he did not rec eive notic e of ou r June 29, 20 22 dismissal opinion and that he did not re ceive notice that he had “ a hearing
to attend to. ” According to appellant, the email address he provided to the Court was typed into t he sys tem incorrectly, and he d id not re ceive our emailnotification s. O ur recor ds show that appel lant ’ s email address was incorrect, but

has now be en corrected. Under these circumstances, w e GRANT app ellant ’ s motion for an out o f time motion for rehearing and order the motion for rehear in g re ceived by the Court on August 18, 2022 filed as of the date of this order

. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 4.5

. We D ENY appellant ’ s motion for reh earing, but on the Cour t ’ s own motion,

we VACATE our opinion and judgment of June 29, 2022 and REINSTATE this appeal. Appellant ’ s brief is due THIRTY D AYS from the date of this order. We expressly cau tion appellant that fail ure to file his brief wit hin that time will res ult
in the dismiss al of this appeal wi thout further notice. See T EX
. R

. A PP
. P

. 38.8 (a)(1); 42.3(b), (c).

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III CHIEF JUSTICE
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Logistics Agency
                        The Nation's Combat Logistics Support Agency
                    DLA
            Search
                        Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Logistics Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    What DLA Offers
    
        Excess Property Disposal

    Document Services

    Products

    Services

    Programs

    Working With DLA
    
        Applications

    Small Business

    Federal and International Cataloging

    Defense Data Standards

    Events

    Procurement Policies

    Government Programs

    Forms

    Organizations
    
        DLA Headquarters

    DLA Aviation

    DLA Disposition Services

    DLA Distribution

    DLA Energy

    DLA Land and Maritime

    DLA Troop Support

    DLA CENTCOM & SOCOM

    DLA Europe & Africa

    DLA Indo-Pacific

    Customer Support
    
        Self Help Tools

    How to Order

    Find Your Order

    Customer Facing Offices

    Training

    Brochures

    Warfighter Support

    Customer Service Management

    Careers

    About DLA
    
        Contact Us

    Locations

    Leaders

    News

    History

    Media Gallery

    DLA Campaigns  Home
  Land and Maritime
  About
  DLA Land and Maritime Image Galleries
 DLA Land and Maritime images
 Supply Chain Alliance and Exhibition
 DLA Land and Maritime News
 Hall of Fame Ceremonies
 DSCC Activities
 DLA Land and Maritime Hall of Fame ceremonies
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Clear Search
 2024 DLA Supply Chain Alliance Conference and Exhibition Image Gallery
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Clear Search
 DLA Land and Maritime news
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Clear Search
 
  FIRST

        

        

        
        5
        
        6
        
        7
        
        8
        
        9 (current)
        

        


        


        LAST
 DSCC activities
 Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesOther
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Clear Search
 Contact UsSite IndexStrategic PlanDLA IG HotlineFOIANo FEAR ActWhistleblower ProtectionDLA CareersImagesWebmasterEEOSection 508Public AffairsSAPRExternal Links DisclaimerDOD Information Quality GuidelinesPrivacy/SecurityUSA.govDOD Web PolicyDOD Open GovernmentPlain Language
                    Stay Connected
            
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
Exhibit 31.1

**RULE 13a-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS**

I, William L. Stephens, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of First Niles Financial, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of
the circumstances under which statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the consolidated financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material aspects the consolidated
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

> a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
> relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
> prepared;
> 
> b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
> controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
> 
> c) disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has
> materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrant's internal control over financial reporting;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors
and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

> a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to
> record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
> 
> b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
> reporting

Date: May 14, 2004

---
No. 10-7188.

#### Gregory C. Mallett, Petitioner v. Labor and Industry Review Commission, et al.

562 U.S. 1147, 131 S. Ct. 924,

178 L. Ed. 2d 770,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 528.

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District I, denied.

Same case below, 324 Wis. 2d 583, 785 N.W.2d 688.
Attachment

Approved Change 48B 

Addendum for Revision to DS 940R, Material Release Order 

1. ORIGINATOR: Supply Process Review Committee, Ellen Hilert, Co-Chair, DLA 

J673, Defense Logistics Management Standards Office (DLMSO), 703-767-0676 (DSN 

427), ellen_hilert@hq.dla.mil

2. FUNCTIONAL AREA: Supply

3. REFERENCE: 

a. DLMSO memorandum, Approved DLMS Change 48, Revisions to DLMS 

Supplements: Material Release Order and Material Release Advice (Supply/MILSTRIP), 

December 12, 2001

b. DLMSO memorandum, Approved DLMS Change 48A, Revisions to DLMS 

Supplements: Material Release Order and Material Release Advice (Supply/MILSTRIP), 

February 26, 2002

4. REQUESTED CHANGE:

a. Title: Addendum for Revision to DS 940R, Material Release Order

b. Description of Change: This change modifies the DS 940R, Material Release to 

add an additional code required to support DLMS/DLSS conversion. 

c. Procedures: Revise DS for 940R, Material Release as follows: 

# Location Revision Federal IC 

1 1/N101/0400 Add new qualifier and associated note:

GP Gateway Provider

DLMS Note: Future streamlined data needed for transition 

period to support transaction conversion in a mixed 

DLSS/DLMS environment. Use to identify DAASC as 

originator during conversion when the DLSS transaction 

does not contain a “From” organization.

Add new code. Does 

not require Federal 

IC change prior to 

DS update 

d. Alternatives: None identified.
Attachment

5. REASON FOR CHANGE: This change supports DLMS implementation and 

desired functionality. The DLSS transactions AFX/AFZ, Disposal Shipment 

Confirmation Followup, does not identify the originating activity when prepared by the 

Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service (DRMS). Since all DLMS transactions 

require that the N101 segment identify a from and to address it is necessary to use DAAS 

as the originator for DLMS transactions resulting from conversion of the equivalent 

DLSS. 

6. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES:

a. Advantages: Supports DLMS implementation

b. Disadvantages: None identified 

7. IMPACT: 

a. Publications. Federal Implementation Conventions 940R and corresponding 

DoD 4000.25-M DLMS Supplement. The DS revision does not require prior change to 

the Federal Implementation Convention (IC). All applicable revisions will submitted to 

the Federal IC.

b. DAAS DLMS/DLSS conversion map has been modified to incorporate above 

revision.
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ ROBERT GREENBERG

Robert GreenbergChief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)August 6, 2010/s/ DAVID WEINBERG

David WeinbergChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)August 6, 2010
NO ESPERES POR UNA 

OPERACIÓN A CORAZÓN 

ABIERTO PARA DEJAR 

DE FUMAR.

Mariano, 55 años

Illinois

Fumar puede dañar mucho más que sus pulmones. Mariano necesitó 

una operación a corazón abierto para salvar su vida. Usted puede dejar 

de fumar. Para recibir ayuda gratuita, llame al 1-855-DÉJELO-YA. 

#CDCConsejos
Algunas de las razones para 

dejar de fumar son pequeñitas. 

Algunas de las razones para 

dejar de fumar son pequeñitas. 

Amanda, 30 años, Wisconsin

 #CDCConsejos

Amanda fumó durante su embarazo. Su bebé 

nació 2 meses antes y pesó solo 3 libras. 

Tuvieron que poner a la bebé en la incubadora y 

alimentarla con una sonda. Amanda solo la podía 

cargar dos veces al día. Si está embarazada o 

piensa tener un bebé y fuma, por favor llame al

1-855-DÉJELO-YA.
#### *State, Respondent, v. James, Petitioner,*

No. 91784-1.

Petition for review of a decision of the Court of Appeals, No. 44906-4-II, March 31, 2015, 186 Wn. App. 1039. *Denied*September 30, 2015.
|                 |   |                          |
|----------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
|                 |   |                          |   |
| Dated: April 7, 2010 | By:    | /s/ Barry B. Goldstein        |   |
|                 |   | Barry B. Goldstein            |   |
|                 |   | Chief Executive Officer  |   |
|                 |   |                          |   |

|   |   |                                                |
|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                |   |
|   | By:    | /s/ Victor Brodsky                                  |   |
|   |   | Victor Brodsky                                 |   |
|   |   | Chief Accounting Officer andChief Financial Officer |   |
|   |   |                                                |   |

|   |   |
|--------|--------|